Gold Standard, Inc. v. American Barrick Resources Corp.
Utah Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
STEWART, Justice:
Plaintiff Gold Standard, Inc., obtained interlocutory review of a district court order holding that Gold Standard could make no further use during discovery of two documents of Getty Oil Company and Getty Mining Company because they were subject to the work product privilege. We hold that the documents are not subject to the work product privilege and that even if they were, Getty waived its right to assert that privilege.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
In December 1973, Getty and Gold Standard entered into a joint operating agreement for the development of the Mercur mine in Tooele…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- United States v. NoblesSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Lois Sportswear, U.S.A., Inc., and Textiles Y Confecciones Europeas, S.A. v. Levi Strauss & Company, Defendant-Plaintiff-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1986
- United States v. DavisCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
- The Duplan Corporation v. Deering Milliken, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1976
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- State Ex Rel. United Hospital Center, Inc. v. BedellWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1997
- Wells Dairy, Inc. v. American Industrial Refrigeration, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2004
- Angel Investors, LLC v. GarrityUtah Supreme Court · 2009
- Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance v. Automated Geographic Reference CenterUtah Supreme Court · 2008
- Askew v. HardmanUtah Supreme Court · 1996
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.